Nishi vs Gasquet the most interesting match for me. Gasquet is capable of playing well enough to upset Nishi. I hope he does not, because I do not think he is capable of challenging either Andy or Nole, while Nishi might just have a chance is stars align. Even so, who knows, I might end up rooting for Richard once the match starts.

Isner is a good opponent for Andy in that he will not force Andy into grueling rallies. Still, although clay is obviously not Isner's best surface, he can be dangerous here and is perfectly capable of taking sets off players. Andy cannot afford to lose many more sets so he should make sure to come sharp right out of the blocks.

Not as interested in the other two matches. Wawrinka and Raonic could lose, but only if they do not play anywhere near their best.

Last edited by summerblues on Sun 29 May 2016, 4:26 am; edited 1 time in total

Gasquet is a joy to watch when in this form, and he really must take this opportunity to progress.

I can remember watching a match of Gasquet's in the late evening sun, on a packed outside court at the Aussie Open. Can't recall whether it was 2014 or '15 (I made the long trek down to Melbourne in both years ....) when he was up against Kevin Anderson. Gasquet wasn't at his best, and Anderson's serve was firing well. But although he lost in straights (IIRC), I still remember many in the crowd - some of whom had perhaps never seen him before - gasping at the sheer beauty of that Reeshard backhand ......

Real test now against Murray. That's where we will see if he has really turned a corner. That said he looks like having grown as a man and he handles the home crowd much better than in the past (where it was just extra pressure to him).

Ignoring Walkovers the H2H for Andy Murray & Richard Gasquet is played ten, Murray winning Seven and Gasquet winning Three. One might expect Murray to win in four sets. This is just based on past results. They have met twice at Roland Garros In 2010: Murray winning in five sets (1st round). And 2012: Murray winning in four sets (fourth round). Murray has won their last four meetings but never in straight sets.

It's all about knowing your opponent. Has Gasquet got anything new to surprise Murray with? Gasquet has to play very well, has to play with confidence, and Murray has to be quite below par - to lose this IMO. Not sure how they match up physically - Gasquet has in the past been known to be a bit of a lightweight, perhaps playing great in the first or second set but ultimately losing. Only time will tell what will happen in this match.

But credit for Gasquet for getting to another QF.

I see that Gasquet has recovered from what was called a back injury that saw him withdraw from this years Australian Open.

His record this year (after recovering from his back injury) is won 15 lost 6 with one 250 title (Montpellier).

Last edited by Nore Staat on Sun 29 May 2016, 8:46 pm; edited 1 time in total

Tough to analyse but here goes. Murray's serve is stronger than Nishikori and he returns better than Nishikori. He doesaid hold the upper hand recently against Gasquet as well. On the other side of the coin Gasquet looks to be in good shape and should be very fresh and will have the crowd fully behind him.

Gasquet is ranked 12th, but 8th-12th are very close. This win together with other results could help him move uphttp://www.atpworldtour.com/es/rankings/singlesHowever that's really only needed ahead of a lot of points to defend in the second half of the year, especially the SF at Wimbledon

He is only 27th in race points which is pretty poor and suggests decline.

On the other hand his last three slams played have been QF or better. Prior to this, he never managed even two in a row QF or better, it was more like one every few years. So this is his best slam form ever. Not sure what to make of that. Just a couple of good results at slams that he happened to get, or yet another player after Ferrer, Stan and others that is going to be better at 31 than 26 in this new era of peaking later?

I think Nishikori's defeat is good news for Murray, Stan and Djokovic, since Nishi is probably slight more capable of shocking them (at least he has form beating Djokovic at the US open). I could yet be proved wrong of course.

Slightly surprising result for Kei. Perhaps his worst result almost of the whole season so far. He is having an excellent season, really only losing to very top players, 4th in the race should be on course for World Tour finals this year, at masters and slam level this season he has only really been losing to Rafa and Novak.

I think a couple of you are overrating Gasquet's chances. I do think he has a better chance than usual here against Murray but you have got to make Andy the clear favourite. I don't see Andy putting in a really shocking performance at this stage and I don't see how Gasquet can hurt him. You can't see Murray rolling over and losing in straight sets and he remains the favourite in a physical and mental battle.

There are some signs of more steel in Gasquet the last few years, so anything's possible though.

Gasquet is ranked 12th, but 8th-12th are very close. This win together with other results could help him move uphttp://www.atpworldtour.com/es/rankings/singlesHowever that's really only needed ahead of a lot of points to defend in the second half of the year, especially the SF at Wimbledon

He is only 27th in race points which is pretty poor and suggests decline.

On the other hand his last three slams played have been QF or better. Prior to this, he never managed even two in a row QF or better, it was more like one every few years. So this is his best slam form ever. Not sure what to make of that. Just a couple of good results at slams that he happened to get, or yet another player after Ferrer, Stan and others that is going to be better at 31 than 26 in this new era of peaking later?

I think Nishikori's defeat is good news for Murray, Stan and Djokovic, since Nishi is probably slight more capable of shocking them (at least he has form beating Djokovic at the US open). I could yet be proved wrong of course.

Slightly surprising result for Kei. Perhaps his worst result almost of the whole season so far. He is having an excellent season, really only losing to very top players, 4th in the race should be on course for World Tour finals this year, at masters and slam level this season he has only really been losing to Rafa and Novak.

I would read nothing into his being only 27th in points race for this year as he missed the first couple of months or do due to a shoulder injury.

Surprising result in the Gasquet-Kei match, as I thought Kei would win comfortably. IMHO, this is good for Murray, even though Gasquet appears in good form and will have the crowd behind him. I thought a match with Kei would be a hard slog for Andy. He'll be much happier, I guess, playing Richard. Still astonishes me how badly the French men do at their own tournament. There's plenty of them and many are quite highly ranked, Yet year after year they never seem to touch the heights. Compare this with Henman and Murray's records at Wimbledon. The lone singles hope, huge pressure, but a string of semis by both players, and finals and a win for Murray.

sirfredperry wrote:Surprising result in the Gasquet-Kei match, as I thought Kei would win comfortably. IMHO, this is good for Murray, even though Gasquet appears in good form and will have the crowd behind him. I thought a match with Kei would be a hard slog for Andy. He'll be much happier, I guess, playing Richard.

Well on yesterday's showings I'd sooner Andy was playing Nishikori. It was an odd display from Kei. Perhaps he was fatigued from his previous round five setter, maybe the damp conditions didn't help or maybe he just couldn't handle the partizan home crowd - who knows? Anyway lets not forget how excellent Gasquet was evewn in the mental department - normally a big failing of his. He will also go into the Murray match as fresh as a daisy which will help.

Gasquet is ranked 12th, but 8th-12th are very close. This win together with other results could help him move uphttp://www.atpworldtour.com/es/rankings/singlesHowever that's really only needed ahead of a lot of points to defend in the second half of the year, especially the SF at Wimbledon

He is only 27th in race points which is pretty poor and suggests decline.

On the other hand his last three slams played have been QF or better. Prior to this, he never managed even two in a row QF or better, it was more like one every few years. So this is his best slam form ever. Not sure what to make of that. Just a couple of good results at slams that he happened to get, or yet another player after Ferrer, Stan and others that is going to be better at 31 than 26 in this new era of peaking later?

I think Nishikori's defeat is good news for Murray, Stan and Djokovic, since Nishi is probably slight more capable of shocking them (at least he has form beating Djokovic at the US open). I could yet be proved wrong of course.

Slightly surprising result for Kei. Perhaps his worst result almost of the whole season so far. He is having an excellent season, really only losing to very top players, 4th in the race should be on course for World Tour finals this year, at masters and slam level this season he has only really been losing to Rafa and Novak.

Great post, i agree kei going out is good for Stan, Novak, and Andy. I can't ever see Richie beating Novak. A horrific matchup for him. Novak abuses Richie's second serve and Gasquet basically still has to chip most second serve returns. Plus Novak's court positioning is so much more aggressive and his change of direction, and gazza's deep positioning constantly put him in distress.

Gasquet has to be taken very seriously I think. He's just comfortably taken care of two very dangerous players in a row and was smoking the ball yesterday. If he plays like that, he's a much tougher threat to Andy than Kei (whose serve would have been destroyed).

Born Slippy wrote:Gasquet has to be taken very seriously I think. He's just comfortably taken care of two very dangerous players in a row and was smoking the ball yesterday. If he plays like that, he's a much tougher threat to Andy than Kei (whose serve would have been destroyed).

Agreed. Kei looked surprisingly under-powered and out of his depth yesterday so I'd sooner have seen Andy play that Kei than the Richard on show yesterday playing up to the crowd.

However, it shows that even the very best players can have off days. The knack is dodging the bullet to stay afloat in the tournament and Kei couldn't do that yesterday.

Nore Staat wrote:You are presenting yourself as some heroic figure in a B action movie. I don't this is the case. This is just people talking.

Maybe Nore you would have less patience if you were taunted and ridiculed for years online by people who never produced any evidence for any of their claims while your facts were brushed aside. You may not believe this but before a certain cadre showed up on this site to take relentless shots at me there was never any fighting and I was as sweet as honey to all. I have been racially abused, abused for my religion although I have no religion,banned, personally insulted, had my positions distorted and lied about, whole threads done with my name in the headlines to mock me; so maybe I am less forgiving and I suffer fools less gladly.

I am not going to claim that I don't enjoy an occasional dust up or that i behaved perfectly either, if I couldnt take the heat I would have left a long time ago. But if people want to fight with me, in the immortal words of Val Kilmer as Doc Holliday, "I'll be your huckleberry"

Seriously Socal you do all the things you accuse other people of doing and most of the time you initiate these exchanges. You're constantly ridiculing people and their views, making up strawmen and then play the victim card. In fact you spend as much time whining as you do expressing your views. I actually think you talk a lot of sense but as Haddie once noted, your tone is inapropriate and overly aggressive. I know I do that at times but in my case it's a spur of the moment impassioned response and I usually try to ameliorate the situation.

You're basically an internet bully. Perhaps you should re-read some of your posts and then you'll see why you seem to have run ins with so many people.

emancipator

Please can you name the person I abused racially? And no I don't lie about people's positions i may misunderstand someone who is being vague with an argument but if they clarify I do not continue to burn the strawman. By the way I get on with pretty much most posters, I have problems with those that come after in a dishonest or insulting manner. And I make no apologies for that. I do take exception to you characterizing me as an online bully, I am someone who just won't be bullied. If someone comes after me in an unfair or rude manner I am within my rights to defend myself.

Take Haddie, I would make a simple completely substantive analysis after a nasal loss and she would go bonkers with personal insults. I am glad I answered her in kind, she initiated every fight, every single won. She is notorious for clawing even Rafa fans eyes out if they say anything about Rafa's game she doesn't like. Be fair emanci when have not been a fair neutral to Nadal? You even accused me of being a closet Nadal fan the last time you were here.

Despite taking up wrongly for Haddie who fully deserved what I gave her. If she tries to claw my eyes out for saying Rafa's FH isn't as dominant as it used to be with personal insults I am to blame?

Either way I am glad your posting despite you name calling me a bully and defending Momma Bear Nadal with the acid tongue? By the way I borrowed that term from Bb who has away with words and has had the same experience with her.

No, I wasn't referring to racism or you being bigoted - I apologise if I gave that impression - however, I stand 100% by the rest of my post. but I'm happy to let bygones be bygones.

Nore Staat wrote:You are presenting yourself as some heroic figure in a B action movie. I don't this is the case. This is just people talking.

Maybe Nore you would have less patience if you were taunted and ridiculed for years online by people who never produced any evidence for any of their claims while your facts were brushed aside. You may not believe this but before a certain cadre showed up on this site to take relentless shots at me there was never any fighting and I was as sweet as honey to all. I have been racially abused, abused for my religion although I have no religion,banned, personally insulted, had my positions distorted and lied about, whole threads done with my name in the headlines to mock me; so maybe I am less forgiving and I suffer fools less gladly.

I am not going to claim that I don't enjoy an occasional dust up or that i behaved perfectly either, if I couldnt take the heat I would have left a long time ago. But if people want to fight with me, in the immortal words of Val Kilmer as Doc Holliday, "I'll be your huckleberry"

Seriously Socal you do all the things you accuse other people of doing and most of the time you initiate these exchanges. You're constantly ridiculing people and their views, making up strawmen and then play the victim card. In fact you spend as much time whining as you do expressing your views. I actually think you talk a lot of sense but as Haddie once noted, your tone is inapropriate and overly aggressive. I know I do that at times but in my case it's a spur of the moment impassioned response and I usually try to ameliorate the situation.

You're basically an internet bully. Perhaps you should re-read some of your posts and then you'll see why you seem to have run ins with so many people.

emancipator

Please can you name the person I abused racially? And no I don't lie about people's positions i may misunderstand someone who is being vague with an argument but if they clarify I do not continue to burn the strawman. By the way I get on with pretty much most posters, I have problems with those that come after in a dishonest or insulting manner. And I make no apologies for that. I do take exception to you characterizing me as an online bully, I am someone who just won't be bullied. If someone comes after me in an unfair or rude manner I am within my rights to defend myself.

Take Haddie, I would make a simple completely substantive analysis after a nasal loss and she would go bonkers with personal insults. I am glad I answered her in kind, she initiated every fight, every single won. She is notorious for clawing even Rafa fans eyes out if they say anything about Rafa's game she doesn't like. Be fair emanci when have not been a fair neutral to Nadal? You even accused me of being a closet Nadal fan the last time you were here.

Despite taking up wrongly for Haddie who fully deserved what I gave her. If she tries to claw my eyes out for saying Rafa's FH isn't as dominant as it used to be with personal insults I am to blame?

Either way I am glad your posting despite you name calling me a bully and defending Momma Bear Nadal with the acid tongue? By the way I borrowed that term from Bb who has away with words and has had the same experience with her.

No, I wasn't referring to racism or you being bigoted - I apologise if I gave that impression - however, I stand 100% by the rest of my post. but I'm happy to let bygones be bygones.

Thank you my instincts that you are fair person has been validated, glad you are back.

Nore Staat wrote:You are presenting yourself as some heroic figure in a B action movie. I don't this is the case. This is just people talking.

Maybe Nore you would have less patience if you were taunted and ridiculed for years online by people who never produced any evidence for any of their claims while your facts were brushed aside. You may not believe this but before a certain cadre showed up on this site to take relentless shots at me there was never any fighting and I was as sweet as honey to all. I have been racially abused, abused for my religion although I have no religion,banned, personally insulted, had my positions distorted and lied about, whole threads done with my name in the headlines to mock me; so maybe I am less forgiving and I suffer fools less gladly.

I am not going to claim that I don't enjoy an occasional dust up or that i behaved perfectly either, if I couldnt take the heat I would have left a long time ago. But if people want to fight with me, in the immortal words of Val Kilmer as Doc Holliday, "I'll be your huckleberry"

Seriously Socal you do all the things you accuse other people of doing and most of the time you initiate these exchanges. You're constantly ridiculing people and their views, making up strawmen and then play the victim card. In fact you spend as much time whining as you do expressing your views. I actually think you talk a lot of sense but as Haddie once noted, your tone is inapropriate and overly aggressive. I know I do that at times but in my case it's a spur of the moment impassioned response and I usually try to ameliorate the situation.

You're basically an internet bully. Perhaps you should re-read some of your posts and then you'll see why you seem to have run ins with so many people.

emancipator

Please can you name the person I abused racially? And no I don't lie about people's positions i may misunderstand someone who is being vague with an argument but if they clarify I do not continue to burn the strawman. By the way I get on with pretty much most posters, I have problems with those that come after in a dishonest or insulting manner. And I make no apologies for that. I do take exception to you characterizing me as an online bully, I am someone who just won't be bullied. If someone comes after me in an unfair or rude manner I am within my rights to defend myself.

Take Haddie, I would make a simple completely substantive analysis after a nasal loss and she would go bonkers with personal insults. I am glad I answered her in kind, she initiated every fight, every single won. She is notorious for clawing even Rafa fans eyes out if they say anything about Rafa's game she doesn't like. Be fair emanci when have not been a fair neutral to Nadal? You even accused me of being a closet Nadal fan the last time you were here.

Despite taking up wrongly for Haddie who fully deserved what I gave her. If she tries to claw my eyes out for saying Rafa's FH isn't as dominant as it used to be with personal insults I am to blame?

Either way I am glad your posting despite you name calling me a bully and defending Momma Bear Nadal with the acid tongue? By the way I borrowed that term from Bb who has away with words and has had the same experience with her.

This is blatantly untrue .. a statement made up to suit your own agenda... you bully everyone not just me.. you threatened me to the point where I know if you had been on my side of the computer you would have hit me.. I reported the fact to the mods

You have name my husband made personal insults to me... you are a bigot and a back street bully who has a chip on their shoulder as big as a brick.BB, and I have had our heated discussions but then I go back years with BB and it has become a way of life with us. He however has never threatened me LK left not because of Jahu but because of you....You undermine and belittle everyones opinions that do not agree with yours. Your superior no it all attitude is the death of this forum.. whatever you know, or you think you know, gets drowned n screeds and screeds of your self opinionated views.Your conceited to the point of being sickening this forum should be entitled Socal's Undisputed facts of Tennis... any poster disagreeing will be banned,.So if you don't call names then what is MUMMA BEAR NADAL.. eh.????l DUPLICITY of the first order SOCAL Novak's Bully Boy

I only regret that I had to get down there in the gutter with you Socal but that's where street fighters do their dirty work !!!!!!!!!

Breathe and count to ten that is how I counsel people like you who have anger management issues. I didn't even read your post simply because I am sure it's filled with nonsense. Sorry Haddie, everyone knows you on this site and you aren't known for pleasant disposition

I may not agree with everything H-N says about tennis. But I know she is a person of vast experience and talent and is deserving of respect rather than someone to be treated as a kid to be bullied in the schoolyard. Perhaps your training and experiences in the cut-throat environment of the law court does on occasion cause you to act like an ass at times. That doesn't make you a bad person. We can all do this at times.

Ps: this is not a point of debate. It is my opinion. Give and take, respect, move on.

Last edited by Nore Staat on Tue 31 May 2016, 12:12 pm; edited 1 time in total